DCKing

85 ms·

751.
by DCKing 12y ago
I did not downvote. But I disagree his post contributes to the conversation. Nobody believes the strawman argument that Google is a "benevolent company". Of course they are being assholes to make their services more used. Everyone
752.
by DCKing 12y ago
It doesn't matter whether you can download the source for the devices you buy in the store. Not in the context of this discussion about vendor lock-in. You're using a red herring. The point is: if you don't like devices on sa
753.
by DCKing 12y ago
"Google is bent on establishing platform domination unlike anything we've ever seen, even from late-1990s Microsoft." [citation needed]. I think this is an assumption, and it needs to have some basis. Can somebody explain to
754.
by DCKing 12y ago
I stand corrected. So it's a feature of Apple's runtime on all 64 bit systems.
755.
by DCKing 12y ago
What a peculiar design. They went for an in order design instead of the out-of-order design that has been standard in high-end ARM cores for years. Out-of-order usually brings more instructions per clock cycle ("more efficient"),
756.
by DCKing 12y ago
It is worth noting that this is likely to be an iOS-on-AArch64 specific tweak. Apple doesn't do this on x64 OS X (right?). Furthermore, nothing has been said (AFAIK) about similar tricks Google is doing with Android on AArch64 or 64 bi
757.
by DCKing 12y ago
> I never thought you could describe one of the most natural processes in that light. Nature contains the most disgusting things known to man. Most of nature is pretty disgusting in general, especially when observed from up close. Don&#x
758.
by DCKing 12y ago
It seems that what you really wanted to do is to criticize the narrative of the story. But you end up criticizing the factual truth of the story. Those are two different things. Just because the words chosen to describe this piece of biolog
759.
by DCKing 12y ago
iOS has better usability on this, but Android's permissions are still far more detailed and fine grained. If Android adopted some of iOS user control features, which seems to be happening [1], it would be almost perfect. I definitely a
760.
by DCKing 12y ago
That is why I put "free" in quotations. Furthermore, many devices sold do allow you to at least put open source equivalents on them on these devices; many flagship phones allow this with some know-how. On the scale of freedom fr
761.
by DCKing 12y ago
That is not the point. Both are very serious issues. But one is a usability+curation problem, and this is an unpatched security exploit. Combining the discussion on these things in this thread is confusing and unhelpful to both issues.
762.
by DCKing 12y ago
To me, browsers defaulting to the Downloads folder improved the user experience. You might care much about where exactly your files are going, but I generally don't. Of the two, I think "not caring much" is the default option
763.
by DCKing 12y ago
This is very problematic for Android. It was a question of time before such an issue crept up that left a large amount of legacy devices fully compromisable remotely. This is the biggest problem of relegating software updates to a complex a
764.
by DCKing 12y ago
Trying to spread Stallman's ideas by FUD does not help spreading Stallman's ideas. Stop doing that. I don't get why free software zealots hate Android so much. It is by far the most "free" popular operating system e
765.
by DCKing 12y ago
1. There is an exploit that leaves complete control of your phone to anyone without you even having to look at the screen. 2. Some applications want to use too much permissions on your phone. You probably don't want to install them. An
766.
by DCKing 12y ago
I'm sorry about that. I thought we left serious conversation behind when you started asserting that most of the work was done (as Jackson shows, parsing and reflection are not the hard parts of a JSON-to-class library), and continued t
767.
by DCKing 12y ago
Wow, 90% really? It seems you figured it out. Maybe you should break through this appalling apathy and show them how it's done. After all, it's clear that your need should be catered to and these strangers providing things for fre
768.
by DCKing 12y ago
> Is the problem complexity or bandwidth? Bandwidth is a prohibitive technical problem in this case. Complexity of such an API is a solvable problem in principle, but it will only get solved if a practical API can be made. My argument is
769.
by DCKing 12y ago
Look at how much code Jackson uses for their core serialization: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core . This is a (the?) .NET library for the same: https://github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json&#
770.
by DCKing 12y ago
> That's garbage; it's not done now, because there's no ability to do that. One of the selling points of Dart is having typing; nobody would turn this down if it was easy and possible. You assert that Dart has , in princi
771.
by DCKing 12y ago
> A Map is not type safe, at least, not the default result of a JSON.decode in Dart, actually, the result is a dynamic Map. I don't know what your point is. A dynamic type does not give you type safety, and neither does a dynamic Ma
772.
by DCKing 12y ago
> Deserialising JSON onto a simple PODO with no inheritance, no mis-matching of properrty names, etc., is a pretty trivial requirement. This is not serializing into a PODO. This is serializing into a simple struct. Dart does not have sim
773.
by DCKing 12y ago
> Is not about type safe, Dart can be used as both, a type safe lenguage and as a dynamic lenguage, demanding to cover a certain part of of what a type safe language has it is reasonable, now, if the package was to big for Dart designers
774.
by DCKing 12y ago
> I never said I didn't want it there; I said I didn't put it there. You can't tell me I have no right to put something on the homepage when it ended up there because of HN's algorithm (which suggests that others did
775.
by DCKing 12y ago
> I think that moto doesn't fit Dart at all, I use Dart and I have to make some workarounds that I just shouldn't be doing, but I have to because the language doesn't have the functionality that other languajes already hav
776.
by DCKing 12y ago
> Your opinion is no more fact than mine. You've got that right. My problem is that you framed your thread title and general discussion so that it implies that Dart is lacking in JSON support. It's not; Dart's JSON support
777.
by DCKing 12y ago
I think many people are satisfied with the alternatives presented in that thread. A very large percentage will probably even be happy with the serialization to Lists and Maps - because that is what JavaScript already does! I understand that
778.
by DCKing 12y ago
Discussions from last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5410267 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5410071 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395147 I've been a user for
779.
by DCKing 12y ago
I was untder the impression that a Java implementation that wants to call itself Java can actually call itself Java if it is made to pass specification test suites. There is currently one major Java(-like) implementation that does not do th
780.
by DCKing 12y ago
IANAG, but it probably doesn't need to get 100km under the ground. It only needs to go to the depth at which the nuclear waste stops being a problem. With a good amount kilometers of rock between the surface and the waste, the danger i

More ›